DarkStar Spouts Off

Race Pundits Spewing Crap

Two years ago, The Washington Post did a series of articles on Black Men. I referred to it as the Black Men series and I wrote about it here. The first article covered the results of a poll that was taken for the series. I wrote about it here. At this point, I'm going to provide something that caught my attention in the article that I referenced:

Six in 10 black men said their collective problems owe more to what they have failed to do themselves rather than "what white people have done to blacks." At the same time, half reported they have been treated unfairly by the police, and a clear majority said the economic system is stacked against them.

...

Three in four said they value being successful in a career, more than either white men or black women. Yet majorities also said that black men put too little emphasis on education and too much emphasis on sports and sex.

The poll surveyed 2,864 people and had a sample size of 1,328 Black men. If you believe in polls, those are interesting results, especially given the over sample of Black men. But what does this have to do with race pundits or crap being spewed?

[Obama's] victory demonstrates the main platform of my race writing. The guiding question in everything I have ever written on race is: Why do so many people exaggerate about racism?

...

In any case, to insist that we are hamstrung until every vestige of racism, bias, or inequity is gone indicates a grievous lack of confidence, which I hope any person of any history would reject.

I have been consistent is stating that certain pundits on race deliberately over state what is being said and over state the proportion of people stating it. I've stated before, and showed, where certain pundits, including John McWhorter, have written things that don't stand up to the light of scrutiny. I've also stated that it appears they are as bad as the public pundits they most often criticize and call race baiters.

I find it hard to believe that McWhorter has never read the Black Man series nor has never read the poll. And, again, I state that since McWhorter is a linguist, he knows exactly how "so many people" is going to be read. Yet, if you believe in polls and believe the poll represents the attitude of most Black men, then why does McWhorter not quantify "so many people"? My opinion is that he does not want to do so because, for some reason, he has a vested interest in continuing misinformation about race in the public sphere.

A Note On Race And Political Parties

This is a note to all about race and political parties.

It is true:

• The Democratic party was the party that supported slavery.
• A founding principal of the Republican party was abolition of slavery.
• The Democratic party was the party that fought to maintain white supremacy after Reconstruction.
• Many southern Democrats fought civil rights legislation.
• Republicans were vital to the passing of civil rights legislation.
• Democrats were vital to the passing of civil rights legislation.
• At one time the majority of Blacks were Republicans.

However, all of that is in the past forms of the Democratic and Republican parties. That is not the present makeup of both parties. I'm not saying the Republican party would support slavery today, however, the Southern Strategy, as Michael Steele has stated, was real and it was wrong. Today, I contend the Republican party, largely, actively avoids going after the Black vote. This is not the Republican party of years gone by. Nor is the segregationist roots of the Democratic party the Democratic party of today.

Today, the Democratic party is Barack Obama's party. By winning the Democratic presidential nomination, he is the effective leader of the party.

My fellow Republicans, no matter what, at this point, it cannot be said the Democratic party is the party of racists. They have shed that past, Sen. Robert Bryd not withstanding.

Indifferent

The NAACP has selected a new president. He is 35 year old Benjamin Todd Jealous.

While I see this as a possible good sign that the old guard is ready to turn over the wheel, the size of the NAACP board and the fact that Julian Bond is still around, forces me to say that I'm indifferent about the selection. If it works, great, if it doesn't, it doesn't.

Old Guard vs. New School, Getting Noticed

I wrote before about the Wright mess being about the old guard vs. new school. I also tend to write about media misrepresentations of the Black community. So, I guess I should be glad about this article apearing in The Washington Post.

A growing cadre of young black activists is using the Internet in an attempt to eclipse traditional civil rights organizations such as the NAACP and hit the refresh button on the civil rights movement. Bloggers with names such as the Cruel Secretary, and blogs called What About Our Daughters? and the African American Political Pundit, have railed against groups in the "black-o-sphere," saying they do not understand young black Americans, are behind the times and react too slowly to incidents involving the younger generation.

The leaders of the fledgling movement -- Van Jones and James Rucker of ColorOfChange.org -- may not be familiar to many, but their work is. They circulated a letter and a petition last week promising that the Democrats will pay a "political price" if they overturn the will of black and young voters and choose Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y) as the party's nominee over Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.).

Jones and Rucker were also the first to successfully raise awareness about the cases of six black teenagers initially charged with attempted murder for beating a white classmate in Jena, La. The campaign led to one of the largest civil rights marches in the South in recent years.

Blogger Gina McCauley, 32, who is organizing the first conference of nonwhite bloggers this summer in Atlanta, said that what Jones and Rucker have started "can potentially become a new Niagara movement," a reference to the small contingent of black intellectuals, including W.E.B. Du Bois, who met near Niagara Falls in 1905 to form an organization to oppose segregation. The organization eventually became the NAACP.

I'm not glad, in fact I'm feeling nervous. The media has done so much misreporting, and a lot of it deliberate, that I expect another shoe to drop, a bigger shoe, which gets it all wrong. I have to check these blogs to see if the Post article was accurate concerning their comments.

Spouting Off On: "The Black Church"

The Black church isn't defined by Jeremiah Wright. No, the Black church is NOT Jeremiah Wright. That's what I want to say. I've been in many Black churches and I've never been in a church where a pastor has said the things that is being mostly looped and played as Wright's only pulpit statements.

Today I felt compelled to call into a radio show to strongly disagree with the guest who was saying Wright's comments are something that are regularly said from the pulpits of most Black churches across the country. NO! That's just not true. I was compelled to call in because I've heard enough false comments made about Black churches and I've had my fill of it.

I've written before that the idea that most Black churches have Democrats come into their churches and making comments from the pulpits on Sunday's close to elections isn't true. Yes, they do go into selected churches, but those churches are the overwhelming MINORITY of churches. From my experiences, I guess that politicians show up in less than 5% of Black churches. When I've challenged people, AND PUNDITS WITH A WRITTEN AUDIENCE to prove me wrong, I've always been met by silence. I ask them to find out how many Black churches are in a major city and then find out how many of those churches have politicians show up. But to date, no one has taken up that offer.

Wright saying that criticism of him is criticizing the Black church, SHOULD provoke the media to examine "what the Black church" is, but they won't do that because it destroys the model they rely on during the election cycle and the "demonstration" cycle. This goes for the mainstream and conservative media.

And, so far, I haven't heard the mainstream or conservative media mention why Sunday is the most segregated day in America. Rev. Fred Price addressed it and people like Jesse Lee Peterson went after him for speaking the truth. Why does the AME church exist? Why did the Southern Baptist Convention make a resolution on racial conciliation? And why does Bishop Harry Jackson and other preachers have to develop something called the reconciliation referendum?

How many other people are asking the questions I'm asking?

Old Guard vs. New School

This dust up between Wright and Obama is a dust up caused by politics, media, and the ongoing battle between the Black old guard and the Black new school.  (I was going to write old school vs. new school but I think old guard is appropriate because, in my opinion, the old guard is now guarding against the new school taking over).

Thew new school understood and understands that Black politicians cannot rely on just Black voters or just speak to Black voters. Even if their constituency is primarily Black, they know that they can't limit themselves to just Black people. "It's a new day" is the correct term to use and the new school realizes this. That doesn't stop the new school from recognizing racism when it is there, but the focus isn't on that because the main battles have been won. This is exactly what Obama was saying when he mentioned that Wright is the older generation who is viewing things from a different perspective because of what he, Wright, as experienced in his life time.

However, even if that were all that there is to it, this mess would still be a big as it is because this is politics and Obama had previously tied himself to Wright. That makes Wright's comments, out of context or not -- and I agree that many are out of context from what I've been able to hear -- fair game in the war of politics.

Let's be clear about this, Obama lied when he said he didn't know about the comments Wright made. Obama, himself, has backtracked on that so I think lie is the appropriate word to use. Obama tried to have it both ways, he needed to placate Blacks who think politics at this level is just about "being Black", you know, those who asked if Obama was "Black enough". He also needed to placate whites who may have wondered if he was just another "Black politician." His campaign is about showing that he's different and is about change. Remember, "change" was the hot campaign word for a moment. Well, change requires toning down the old guard rhetoric and talking about commonality.

But the old guard still has power and still is capable of flexing. Wright showed finesse when he was interviewed on Moyer's show. Then, he even had some white people wondering if the clips of Wright was fair. I think that's why O'Reily had a fit over the interview because Moyer showed something that wasn't being showed. But when Wright went to the press club, it was old school on display. It was joning on display. It was in your face "Black nationalistic politics" in your face. It was Black Liberation Theology right there in the open, delivered in the charismatic Black preacher style and those who have never seen it, can't deal with it.

Let me be blunt. The mainstream and conservative media wanted to see a contrite, soft speaking Black man, apologize but instead they got the "bad Negro" all up in the place! Actually, what was on display was a man who is sure about what he said, standing tall and defending what he said and what he believes.

Obama And Wright

Wright is speaking up at the most inopportune time for Obama. It is as if he is deliberately trying to take Obama out.

Is this an example of the "old guard" refusing to step aside for the next generation?

[ Update ]

That burned bread you smell it Obama.

Yeah, I Asked What's A Love Language For Punk

Yes, I did ask for a love language translation for Tavis is a punk.

Here is Tavis Smiley discussing his leaving The Tom Joyner Morning Show.

It still seems a little too coincidental, but I take him at his word and apologize for the comment.

Booker T. vs. DuBois B.S.

Let me say this again. ANYONE who says Blacks should have "just followed the Booker T. Washington philosophy" is foolish and not taking into account the times both men were in.

This takes some critical thought, and those who say it may be displaying the inability to display critical thinking, but here it is laid out plain enough for those who say it, to understand. They may not admit it, but they should be able to understand it.

Business creation means nothing if the law of the land does not protect the business owner. If the land the person owns can be taken away without compensation, what good is owning the land? If the business owner cannot rely on business law to protect the business in business transactions, what good is owning the business? If any person cannot rely on the general fair application of the rule of the law, what point is it being a member of the society you are in?

One more time, both men and both ideas were needed at the time. One would have been nothing without the other.

No Love For Tavis?

This morning Tom Joyner announced Tavis Smiley has quit the Tom Joyner Morning Show. Tavis has come under a lot of fire from Blacks for directly criticizing Obama and making statements that appear to Obama supporters, to be attacking Obama, even when Tavis didn't mention Obama's name.

So let me understand this.

Black Republicans and Black conservatives whine about Blacks calling them names but they continue on, and Tavis, who has previously come under fire from Republicans and conservatives, now folds under criticism from Blacks? Even if the criticism wasn't in nice words and some taking it too damn far with threats, Tavis, no longer getting the love from some Blacks, quits?

During the primary, Tavis has said he is trying to keep focused on the issues in the race and not get caught up in the typical topical media feeding frenzies. I think he was doing a good job at that, but he was not getting some love. In fact, Tavis started commenting that Blacks need to develop a "Love Language" to disagree in a disagreeable manner. I think he's right about that, but, just because the language is harsh, he folds?

I need a translation. How do you translate "Tavis is a punk!" into a Black Love Language?

[ UPDATE ]

From Tavis Smiley:

There is no way to put into words the love and respect that Tom Joyner and I have for each other, or the love affair that I’ve had with TJMS listeners for almost 12 years now.

Due to the overwhelming amount of phone calls and emails I have received from listeners and other media, I wanted to briefly clarify a few issues that I will address more fully in my regular TJMS commentary on Tuesday morning, April 15, at 8:20 a.m. ET.

I did not “quit” the Tom Joyner Morning Show effective immediately.  In July I will celebrate my 12th anniversary with the show, and as I discussed with Tom, it is my intention to take on the issues of the day in my commentary twice every week with the same energy, passion and commitment until the end of June.

Contrary to what has been suggested, I have decided to clear some things off my plate so that I can devote my time and attention to some exciting and empowering projects that The Smiley Group, Inc. and other divisions of my company have underway this summer, this fall and beyond.

That's what he said.
   

You Are The Problem

Eugene Robinson, you are part of the problem. How many times have you written about the "good" side of Black America, vs. the "bad" side of Black America?

On April 4, 1968, it was possible to make the generalization that being black in this country meant being poor; fully 40 percent of black Americans lived below the poverty line, according to census data, with another 20 percent barely keeping their heads above water. African Americans were heavily concentrated in the inner cities and the rural South. We were far less likely than whites to go to college, and our presence in the corporate world was minimal.

Today, about 25 percent of African Americans are mired in poverty. In many ways, being black and poor is a more desperate and hopeless condition now than it was 40 years ago. For those who managed to enter the middle class, however, most of the old generalizations no longer apply.

...

Forty years ago, not even 2 percent of black households earned the equivalent of $100,000 a year in today's dollars. Now, about 10 percent of black households have crossed that threshold. George and Louise Jefferson aren't so lonely anymore in that "deluxe apartment in the sky."

In fact, I maintain you focus more on:

For those who haven't made it into the middle class, however, things are different. Inner-city communities were hollowed out -- a process accelerated by the riots that followed King's death -- and left fallow for decades. Middle-class professionals fled, businesses closed, schools disintegrated, family structures fell apart. Drugs and crime were symptoms of the general rot; the gentrification of recent years has just shifted the pathology from one part of the city to another, or perhaps to a close-in suburb, sweeping it into a corner.

And your last paragraph demonstrates it:

It's misleading, then, to make any general statement about the condition of black Americans without recognizing black America's diversity. Economically speaking, there is one group of black Americans that has achieved success and one that hasn't -- and the distance between those groups is growing. To make more progress toward Martin Luther King's dream, we have to make an honest assessment of how far we've come -- and honestly account for who's been left behind.

Be gone with you oh nattering nabob of negativity!

Sharpton Gets Spanked

I had this post as a "featured post" because I thought what Sharpton did was disgusting. He should not have been defending the accused rapists of the Haitian woman who lived in Dunbar Village. Please check out this update. I'll post only a small excerpt.

In the past week, a rapidly-moving viral email campaign was launched, and thousands of concerned black citizens spread the word about a shocking crime against a Black woman and her 12 year old son, in which crimes against nature were committed. (read more details of the crime here)

This email, entitled “Stop Al Sharpton and the NAACP from endangering Black Women,”(source1) (source2) described a stunning betrayal in which the NAACP and Al Sharpton held a press conference and demanded bail consideration for three suspects in custody for the crime.

Again, please go to the link because it provides more background links.

Why Obama's Speech Failed

Obama's speech failed in my opinion for one reason: it didn't go far enough to give whites who had doubts raised because of Wright, that comfortable feeling again. If you haven't read the transcript yet, here it is.

The fact is, the clips demonstrated that Wright is an angry Black man. When Obama stated:
Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions -- the good and the bad -- of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.
That feeds into the fears of some white people that Blacks are angry and racist because of American history.

Obama's speech was nuanced when he had to be direct. Don't get me wrong, it was good, BUT, it wasn't what had to be done. Let me state it, again, in another way. It didn't go far enough to give whites a good feeling.

The following comments from Obama's speech is accurate and on point.

That has been my experience at Trinity. Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety -- the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger.

Like other black churches, Trinity's services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear.

The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.

But that is too nuanced when, I think, right now, emotion and fear of the bad Black man, rules the day.

It just didn't work. I wish I could listen to talk radio to determine if what I'm writing is accurate or inaccurate, but I can't. But a big part of his appeal is that he was not seen as another Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson, Sr., and Wright blew that image out of the water.

Obama's Speech

On the road and running late. I'm listening to Obama's speech and it's not going to do him good I think.

He had a good groove when he mentioned generational differences accounting for Wright's views.

He did a decent job of tying the Black man Wright, to himself, then tying himself to his white grandmother who expressed fear of some Black men.

[ UPDATE ]

Watch for "blame whitey" commentary.

Comments R Us: I'm Tired Of This Ignorant Line Of Thinking

I'm sick and tired of the following IGN'ANT line of "thinking" that some from the Right, try to make:

For example, Michael Steele is highly intelligent and articulate, and having been a State Pary Chairman, as well as a being Lt. Governor....I think he was very well "qualified" to be a U.S. Senator. And considering that there hasn't been a Black U.S. Senator from the State of Maryland, so wouldn't have been groundbreaking? Wouldn't that have been worthy of Black unifying behind him?

Here are 2 responses. You chose which one to pick.

1. Black people didn't unite behind a person you call a "Black leader," Al Sharpton. So why should they unite behind Michael Steele?
2. Why is it that "the right" wants to push qualifications when appropriate, but then when a Black person they deem acceptable is put forth, they want to use the card? You know the card. "But, he's Black!"

Shaddup!

Final Response To Amy Ridenour

The history of this thread is here. Follow the links to catch up if you don't know what's going on.

I really don't want to continue a back and forth, but this is something that I have to correct. Again, I can't see how the following idea:

Finally, DarkStar seems (to me) to be offended by expressions of support for the integration of HBCUs. I remind him that integration has for some generations now been taught in our schools and throughout our society as a positive value at the very center of our civil moral code. As such, no one should be surprised to find members of the integration generations puzzled at continued support for institutions that appear on the surface to reject this value. It would be more surprising if it were not so.

came as a result of anything I wrote.

1. HBCUs are open to white students but white students are reluctant to even apply to the schools. I know HBCUs offer more aid to white students to attend.
2. I wrote that I though some historically white colleges and universities should be closed and the resources and students transfered to the HBCUs. If I were concerned about integration of the HBCUs, I would have never written what I did. For example, I wrote:
   

   Let's close down the University of Maryland Nursing School and re-open the Provident Hospital Nursing School, and have the UMD students "transfer" to Provident.

   The Provident Hospital Nursing School was a Negro Nursing School which my mother attended.
3. I mentioned two HBCUs which are now majority white. I wrote:
   

   Did Massie mention in his letter, and the editors didn't include, the affirmative action programs at HBCUs in his letter? Did Massie mention in his letter, and the editors didn't include, that there are HBCUs like Bluefield State College in West Virginia or Lincoln University in Missouri, which are now mostly white?

   No where did I mention that I thought the schools becoming mostly white is a bad thing.

I have to point this out, with emphasis:

As such, no one should be surprised to find members of the integration generations puzzled at continued support for institutions that appear on the surface to reject this value.

Massie provided no evidence that the HBCUs reject integration. The Thernstroms provided no information that HBCUs reject integration. Amy Ridenour provides no evidence that HBCUs reject integration. At this point, it seems the fact that the schools say they are a HBCU is the only "evidence" that they "reject integration."

Race Hustling Response to Amy Ridenour

The National Center blog has a response to my post, as an addendum from Amy Ridenour. I'm going to respond part by part to make myself clear. Amy writes:

1) DarkStar/Ed Brown refers to Mychal's "race hustling ways." I've been unable to find a definition anywhere for the slang term "race hustling," but I thought it referred to the exploitation of racial divisions for personal profit.

My calling Massie a race hustler is a continuation of using the term against self identified right leaning individuals who I think behave in the same manner as those from the left who they claim are race hustling. As I understand the use, personal profit is not just economics but also getting media attention. And, that IS on intent of Project 21, correct?

2) DarkStar castigates Mychal for not addressing a litany of other, related issues, but letters to major newspapers intended for publication nearly always must be short and succinct to have any hope of being published. Writers can't address everything they might wish to.

She is correct about this point. However, the letter by the president's of the Maryland HBCUs touched upon many topics. Massie touched upon alleged double standards but doesn't even BRIEFLY mention why HBCUs existed in the first place.

Mychal's letter didn't call for closing down historically-black colleges; he exposed the hypocrisy inherent in calling for integration while promoting segregation.

Here is something I guess I didn't explain well. When I wrote, and is quoted by Amy Ridenour:

Here is the bottom line to all of this, besides the disgust I'm feeling towards Massie's letter. Why is it that people like Thernstrom and Massie say close down HBCUs because of their segregated history, instead of saying close down HWCUs, because of THEIR segregated history?

Close down the HWCUs, transfer the money and facilities to the HBCUs, and then let's see what happens.

The intended implication was closing historically white colleges and universities (HWCUs) would further integration of the HBCUs because the white students would be transferred to the HBCUs. So I have to ask why defending HBCUs is promoting segregation? HBCUs didn't discriminate, historically white colleges and universities (HWCUs) discriminated. So, to promote integration, close the HWCUs and transfer the programs, money, facilities, and students to the HBCUs.

Here is some further information that I probably should have written.

State Of The Black Union, 2008

I missed the morning session because D.S. 2.0 is sick and it was a long night. We also made a trip to the urgent care center, a.k.a. a clinic for those with decent medical care, to see about his fever and vomiting. But all is well enough there because it can be addressed with reasonably safe drugs. For God's grace, I'm thankful.

Anyway, the State of the Union afternoon edition is turning out to be a political event supporting Obama or Hillary. I DVR'ed the morning session and will look at it later. I'm recording the second session now, and will watch that later as well. But so far, it seems to be a big waste of time.

I'm going to catch a nap.

Mychal Massie:Race Hustling HBCUs

[ Update 2/24/2008 ] Amy Redenour's National Center Blog responds to this blog entry at this link in an addendum from Amy. In it she writes, among other things that I will respond to in a separate post:

The college presidents and DarkStar attacked Abigail Thernstrom, yet Abigail Thernstrom's essay was jointly written with her husband, Stephan Thernstrom. Isn't the man's input as worthy of note as the female's?

I used Abigail's name only because the presidents only used her name. Amy is right that it is written by Stephan Thernstrom as well. As such, I've updated this entry to go from just referencing Abigail to referencing both of them. That was my bad.

For those of you who are getting here via the National Center Blog, follow this link for my detailed response to Amy Redenour.

---

Mychal Massie of Project 21 is continuing his race hustling ways in this letter to the editor:

There is no debate that historically black institutions have been permitted to escape adherence to Title IV specifically because they are black. What's more, they have escaped penalty while their proponents viciously castigate other institutions for lacking diversity.

It displays hubris of gargantuan proportions when those chastising Ms. Thernstrom insist that the federal government support further violation of Title IV.

Advocating race-based privileges that favor blacks while vehemently opposing nonblack enterprises doing the same is having it both ways.

He is responding to a letter co-written by presidents of Morgan, Coppin, University of Maryland Eastern Shore, and Bowie:

Apparently, one such person is U.S. Civil Rights Commissioner Abigail Thernstrom, who suggested in a recent Wall Street Journal column that the object of the civil rights movement was to eliminate historically black colleges and universities and move the most talented black students into white institutions rather than providing both black and white students equal opportunities to a quality education at either an HBI or a traditionally white campus. Such mistaken interpretations of the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the landmark 1992 Fordice Supreme Court case do a great injustice to historically black institutions and the students they serve. Most unfortunately, they threaten to open old wounds related to race and poverty.

Massie doesn't address their point concerning Thernstrom's "implication".

Quote Of The Year I

"Michael Steele is welcome in my house anytime because he's not Ward Connelly."

Shelia Jackson-Lee, during The State of the Black Union Conference on C-SPAN.

Comments R Us: Fallout From Obama vs Smiley

Cobb wrote this in response to the "battle" between B. Obama and T. Smiley. Go there to read the whole thing. I think it's unfair to excerpt a piece of it.

In response, I wrote this (with my edits):

Obama said he couldn't take the time but his wife could fill his spot and Tavis declined that offer.

This is something [that] Blacks from the Right are delighting in because of the row about the Black Right being punks and never showing up when invited, now the shoe is on the other foot. But the Black Right is, mostly, deliberately missing the point.

The Black Right claims they want the Black masses to hold politicians accountable and Smiley is doing just that [ by holding Obama accountable to show up ].

It's like when the Black Right says Jackson, Sr, Sharpton, the NAACP, etc "controls the minds" of the Black community but publicly ignores when the same Black community slams Jackson, Sr, Sharpton, the NAACP, etc.

Just look at the split in support for Clinton and Obama. The Black Right likes to point it out but won't go that extra step and ask, "Does OR DID the so-called Black leader EVER lead or determine how Black America thinks or acts?"

No, the Black Right won't do that because then the answer would force people to look behind THEIR curtain.

We all know so-called Black leaders don't determine what Black America does or thinks. But too many people from the left and right need to "perpetrate the fraud" for selfish reasons.

That is what I wrote, but I have to add more.

Brain Spew Sunday: Politics

I have a few moments to myself, so let's see if I'm able to remember all of my political thoughts of the past week.

• I'm hoping for a brokered Democratic convention. If that happens, I want to see if the Black Democrats at that level of the party will show some backbone and power that they [ should ] have. If Clinton gets the delegates from Florida and/or Michigan, I want to see an all out war lead by the Obama forces. Even though some may say disenfranchise of votes, the national party made a rule and the party needs to live by it. And if the super delegates decide and the Clinton machine shows its strength, I want to see Black politicians respond against the push.

  The fact is the Kennedy endorsement for Obama was a result of potential power of the Black voters in the Democratic party. If Billary's race baiting was left uncontested, and Billary won, there was real fear that Black voters would stay home in the general election, and that would be death to the Democratic candidate for president.

• I heard Bill Clinton say that a strong vice president or a strong cabinet member doesn't have anything to fear from Bill Clinton if Hillary Clinton wins. Think about the wording of that for a moment. To me, he is saying that if a person isn't stronger than he is, Bill will rule.
• Donna Brazile lets her thoughts be known about super delegates deciding the nomination:

Quick Thought On The Dem Primaries

I think the Clintons are actually doing some good in their racialist (how's that?) antics.

I like seeing the Clintons being taken down a peg in their admiration by some Black folk. The feminists going berserk should give more  ammunition to Black feminists who have serious issues with the white
feminists and I think that is necessary. Finally, the Clintons going racial may move more Black Democrat politicians to grow a pair and really butt the Democratic power structure.

Clinton, Inc, 1, Obama, 0

I am just an observer in the Democratic primary fight but I have been watching with interest what is happening in the Democratic primary for a few reasons. The first reason is I knew there was going to be a strong fight between Clinton, Inc. and Obama . The second reason is because I wanted to see how the Democrat politicians would take part in the fight. The third reason is because I wanted to see how Black Democrats were going to respond to the actions of the Democrats.

As I wrote before, I knew it was going to get dirty once Clinton, Inc. felt as though they were falling behind, and it did. I count myself as one of the many who think Clinton, Inc. pulled the race card to get an advantage. I am also willing to state that the tactic worked for Clinton, Inc.:

Barack Obama leads Hillary Clinton a little more than a week before the South Carolina Democratic primary, as the state's large African-American population moves solidly behind him, according to a new McClatchy-MSNBC poll. The poll underscored a racial divide in the state over the showdown between an African-American man and a white woman. South Carolina is the first state with a large African-American population to vote in this year's Democratic campaign. The poll showed Obama, an Illinois senator, leading among African-Americans by a better than 2-1 ratio. Clinton, a New York senator, led among whites by 2-1. Overall, that translates to nearly a 10-point lead for Obama. "Voters are breaking along racial lines," said Brad Coker, the managing partner of Mason-Dixon Polling & Research, which conducted the survey. "Racial voting patterns are going to play a major role." A white man, former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, was a distant third in the survey and didn't appear to be factor yet in his native-born state.

The poll showed more than half the likely vote coming from African-Americans - 54-43 percent - and a bigger female turnout than male, 59-41 percent. The poll's findings that 15 percent remain undecided - enough to swing the eventual vote - are noteworthy. Also, 1 in 5 who did support candidates said they still might change their minds. Edwards' supporters were more likely to change their minds. The results came after days of verbal warfare between Clinton and Obama supporters over her comments that it took President Lyndon Johnson to accomplish, with civil rights legislation, the dreams of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. Obama supporters accused Clinton of besmirching King. The two blamed aides and overzealous supporters for the fracas during a debate earlier this week. In South Carolina, the poll showed this landscape among likely voters heading into the primary Jan. 26: - Obama, 40 percent.
- Clinton, 31 percent.
- Edwards, 13 percent.
- Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, 1 percent.
- Undecided, 15 percent.

I think the poll results show that Clinton, Inc. succeeded in making Obama a "Black politician." Clinton, Inc. pulled the race card, though not as strong as first done with Sistah Souljah, but it was pulled none the less, and they let the Obama supporter's response do the real "heavy work." I'm not saying Clinton, Inc. should not have been called on their trash, but the blow back against the backlash was predictable. However, the 15% that are undecided will tell the final tale.

Black Republicans and the GOP

The RBE Survey: Engaging Unheard Voices

At the core of its mission, Republicans for Black Empowerment (RBE) seeks to bridge the vast chasm between the GOP and the black community. To garner a greater understanding of the views of black conservative voters and provide perspective to those seeking to target this group, RBE recently conducted a membership survey, the results of which we are pleased to share with the Presidential candidates, the Republican Party, media, members of the black community and general public alike. Our goal is to ensure that the voices of black conservative voters no longer go unheard.

From the RBE report:

What might be most notable, especially to those in the GOP, was the following question: “Which party do you think best serves the interests of black Americans?” Of self identifying black conservatives a full 49% of those questioned replied that neither party served the interest of blacks. This begs the question, how many blacks who would naturally tend toward conservative values vote democrat by habit or simply do not vote at all? And why is the Republican party seemingly content to continue to ignore this demographic?

When there are Black Republicans saying there are issues with the Republican party, how in good name can any public Black Republican place the "blame" on Black voters?

Hat Tip: New Leadership Blog